Price shouldn't be the only reflection of quality (it isn't!) but egos get stroked paying high prices, not sure why, some odd perception that you are better because you have something expensive? seems like an incredibly American approach.

It is really a "insecure moron with more money than brain" approach. But it just so happens that Americans have a large fraction of the money and a correspondingly larger number of "insecure morons".

But I am glad its that way. Insecure morons provide the "capital" with which corporations can develop and extend technology. You can just look at what the bicycles in non-capitalist countries are and imagine racing on thos bikes that are "equal" to everyone else's.

No BS marketing hype here!

LOL - my point was not to advocate an alternative economic system, just that it's a fact of consumerism that you'll get this.

BTW - Boris bikes in London and Velebs in Paris aren't so different to your photo - 20kg a piece.

Why? Because we will pay for it. Stiffer, bigger, lighter. I think 90% of those claiming they can "feel" greater stiffness is BS.

It started with components. Years ago you could buy 3 Dura Ace rear derailleurs for the price of 1 Record rear derailleur. Everyone justified it saying the Campy was superior to the Dura Ace. Both groups evolved by Shimano raised their pricing to gain bigger margins since Campy could charge and get the higher pricing. Then then they all kept raising pricing since they said and the group this year is so much better than last years.

Ha - this is simple economics at work - it's not often / or standard practice to set a price on anything purely based on what it costs to actually produce - you charge for it perceived value to the customer. The manufacturer has to make sure they have covered all of their costs. future R&D, etc. (It's surprising how many don't even know this sometimes!) Once that done, they can and do charge more, if possible!

The best example I came across was a specialist toolmaker making some tiny widgets to fit into some really high-end final product that no-one else could make. They asked me 'how much shall we charge for these things' we discussed the problem, they literally cost pennies to make, but relied heavily on years of experience, know-how, etc. The final medical product sold for millions, so the widget was worth a great deal to the customer - without a steady supply of the widgets their product and service would not work. So we charged 'appropriately'.... !! Certainly more that what it just cost to make!! But not an outrageous amount

You just can not compare prices today with prices of yesterday. Take textreme-frames for instance, the carbon fiber is shipped from Toray in Japan over to Sweden to be woven, then it might be sent to USA to be filled with the nano epoxy, then it's shipped to south east Asia in subzero temperature packaging to be put in the frame mold...

This is waaaaay more high tech and more costly than anything else mass produced only a few years ago...

Or take derailleurs, today they are carbon and titanium in very precise and complex constructions, ceramic bearings, ti-bolts and what not. By comparison a DuraAce 7400 RD is very cheap and simple to produce...

And if you want this evolution to continue, you will have to pay a bit upfront today so there is R&D money in the loop for tomorrow... You are not just paying for parts and labour, if you did, we would still be buying 7400-groupsets, year in, year out...

The prices are spiraling as the R&D is sky rocketing. Look at the top end stuff, the really, really top end stuff. What's happening in bicycles today is just freaking awesome...

But luckily, nobody has to take part of the evolution, buy 105/Athena/Rival and be a happy camper.

I really don't think you're looking at this from an engineering standpoint. Consider the difficulties of coming up with hollow chain rings, or have a look at what a modern top end carbon frame looks like on the inside, or implementing basalt fibers in carbon constructions for added comfort, ...honestly, this list can be made endless.

But you need to compare all of it with what we had 15 short years ago. On that, all in all, short time scale, wouldn't you agree the rate of evolution is just staggering? ...also take into account the amount of consumers to spread the cost on, high end bicycles aren't exactly smart phones...

Look at a top flight bike from 1998 and take your pick at this years eurobike. It's night and day on a tech level.

And speaking of aerodynamic frames, Specialized just built their own freaking windtunnel - big enough to take 5-6 riders at the same time to be able to.test aerodynamics on whole groups of riders... This obviously doesn't come cheap.

Absolutely, but if companies like Canyon can afford their own CT Scanner for R&D/QA, and still turn out very competitive frames for €2000 I can't help but think there's a lot of 'cost adjustment' going on with other brands, even when you factor in importer/dealer profit.

Addding fibers to a fiber based material? that isn't the huge leap you might believe it to be.

15 yrs. ago bike construction took advantage of contemporary industry abilities, just like today. Technology increases without fail and this then trickles down into our lives. Of course bikes from the past aren't as technologically advanced! (not sure why this isn't obvious) and if you look at the size of the bike market in the past, this market (consumer pool) is massive, which should make tech more even affordable with the increased sales. Not a phone but more common than ever.

A private wind tunnel is the big R&D ticket? I'm glad to see it, but still not enough to make me feel like I'm getting good value for my carbon bike dollar.

I'm not saying it's more difficult to do, but you have to recognize that producing hollow chainrings (as a good example) is more labour intensive and therefore more costly than a stamped or machined flat ring, plus the R&D, just because someone figured out a method the specific implementation to ones own product isn't exactly free...

Your complaint is that you don't want to pay anything extra for this extra labour, for the man hours it took too make it actually happen, and so forth. Btw patents aren't exactly free of cost either. You just think the market should grow at a pace where all costs are equaled due to trickle down... If that was the case, I'd say we wouldn't be anywhere near the results we are today.

But as I said, you may have your trickle down equaled prices, just that what said DuraAce back in the day says 105 today. You just have to accept that in this short time frame, trickle down can't bring you DA9000Di2 at DA7400-prices... You can get current 105 at 7400-prices, that's the trickle down for you, you are still getting a more sophisticated product for the same money.

I use Shimano as an example, the same goes for just about everything else, people wanting a textreme-frame today for the price of a lugged tube carbon frame back then, or you may have a molded UD-fibre frame today for the cost of a lugged frame back then, ...that's trickle down - the ceiling has just been raised by a fair bit today, maybe your ego can't handle not being top dog anymore, is that it?

But I am glad its that way. Insecure morons provide the "capital" with which corporations can develop and extend technology. You can just look at what the bicycles in non-capitalist countries are and imagine racing on thos bikes that are "equal" to everyone else's.

No BS marketing hype here!

I realise you're not being entirely serious but this is a bit like taking a photo of all the everyday cars on a motorway/freeway and posting them on a forum about racing cars!

That photo looks very similar to the cycle ways in quite a bit of market economy Europe. Netherlands or some of the newer paths getting into Cambridge.

As @Keith pointed out very simply and correctly a few posts above, whatever costs are involved in a products design, development and manufacture, all those costs do is determine the minimum price that must be charged to cover those costs. Once costs are covered, pricing takes on a life of its own and all kinds of things can determine it. What the market will bear often has no relationship at all to the costs involved. Enter the marketing people.

I don't think any company is actually piling up billions of $$$ and go out spending it on luxury yachts or buying small paradise islands, as some seem to think. Many of them are putting the money back in the game, just not into the merchandise. It goes into future investments, that you will not see the fruits of for another decade, maybe two. But it's there, like say a wind tunnel. Or lots of the big players put the money back in the game thru sponsoring teams, sponsoring single riders, supporting local races, aiding bike parks, velodromes, downhill tracks, etc, arranging public events, goodwill, concept stores, and whatnot...

Feeding the market, will make the market grow, thus generating more profits, which if once again put back into the market, will make the market grow even more...

Face it, the market is a bank, keep your money in there and it will grow. Ofcourse companies will take out profits, this is not charity, but you will also see the big names like Shimano, Sram, Specialized, Cannondale, etc, put a lot of the money back in the market (one way or another) so it may grow even more...

Anything else, would business wise just be daft. This is not farmer's market economics. And the past decades cycling boom is certainly no lucky coincidence.

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum